I'll need to start talking to my fiance' about a Texas vacation; not anytime
soon though.. we're still trying to figure in a wedding & honeymoon.
Aaron Wyse in AL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Slick North" <prodog@swbell.net>
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:00 AM
Subject: DML: Re: Turbo Dakotas
>
> Moving the engine and transmission sounds a little nuts... I'd stick
> with the traditional way...fabricating a turbo exhaust manifold or
mounting
> the turbo at the exit of the factory exhaust manifold... intake piping
is
> necessary no matter how you do it...
>
> If you were down here in Texas, I could show you the easiest way to do
it...
>
> Later!
> Tom "Slick" North
> 96 Dodge Dakota 5.2L RC
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aaron Wyse" <awyse@sw.rr.com>
> To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 2:38 AM
> Subject: DML: Turbo Dakotas
>
>
> >
> > I was discussing our concepts and ideas of the turbo 2.5L's with a guy
at
> > the machine shop; and upon looking under the hood of my Gen II. Quickly
> came
> > up with a way that may simplify doing the turbo conversions. Rather
than
> > fabricate and relocate the intake & exhaust routing.. He suggested just
> > moving the eng & trans forward ( not like we don't have plenty of room).
> Be
> > easier to lengthen a driveshaft, and move the shift linkage.. Or if you
go
> > with an AT.. just the driveshaft.
> > Does this sound like it may be more feasible?
> > Aaron Wyse
> > 94 RC WS 2.5L 5spd
> > 84 RamCharger 4X4 5.9L
> > 86 Shelby Charger Turbo
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:46:37 EST